oi vey, now we're brancing off into ROM/Emu... we're digging deep into (C) law now...
Oh, when you're dealing with meadia such as movies, songs, books, games, etc, you are allowed to back up ONLY YOUR SPECIFIC MEDIA. IF you bought the rom-ripping tool and coppied Mario 3 from your SNES cartridge, then yes, it's legal. However, loadloadfing the rom is not because your rom will be serial # 1234 and the rom you downlaoded is serial #5678. Meaning that there tehcnically might be different features or bugs in it, so it's not a bakcup, so it's stolen. Can anyone do anyhting about it? If you own the ROM's original media, then no. Most companies, in fact, turn a blind eye to the majority of classic retrogaming ROMs (S/NES, Genesis, etc) because you're nolonger cutting into their profits, and you ARE getting them publicity every time you say the name "Nintendo" or "Sega". MY favorite example was a website from years ago called Demons Bane Roms. NOA (Nintendo of America) sent them a letter, asking for 3 roms to be removed (Earthbound, Supermario RPG, and I dont remember the third) but that they could keep the rest (at this time the SNES was still being manufactured, but was outdated and more a novelty than a true system, though those 3 games were still selling more than a few coppies). This is the same idea as allowing fans to write "fanfiction" of your series; it's getting you more public attention, and getting fans mroe interested in your series/game/etc. If somone downloads Mario RPG, they mag go out and buy Mario RPG 2 (Paper MArio - though at this point that's even outdated).
The same is true with DVDs, though, again, many companies have turend a blind eye to this because sales are better than ever, despite the piracy.
The only group raising a s*** is RIAA, and many recording artists are turning against them now (eventually RIAA will completely fall appart because they alienate mroe and mroe ppl every day with their antics - such as presecuting such "notorious" pirates as a 90-year-old grandfather who's grandkids used his internet to download music, and an 8-year-old poverty-striken girl living in the ghettos who, somewhat logically, though that by buying the file sharing software what she was doing was legal...)
Anyway, this is becomming a rant on (C) law. I probably shoudl jsut shut up now...
__________________
"There is a differance between living and existing. Existing is sitting, waiting patiently for death. Living is meeting thantos' scythe with your own blade" --- Original
Blackberry 7510 + operamini + $10 boost mobile = unlimited internet on BB w/o $40 BIS plan! (no email though)
^ Not saying its impossible to do so but hard to argue that. As I am one of many who are willing to pay and yet I find myself looking for whom to buy support for my discontinued product.
Even harder when the OEM completely leaves the product line altogether.
Ehh I bit the bullet & did it *8 minutes ago* :hide:
Lawyers do not decide issues of law. They are gladiators in the grand-arena we call "the court".
Your Lawyer may tell you it's ok to post a ROM and Microsoft's Lawyer will disagree. See which one costs you more. If you wish to ask a lawyer, that's entirely your call.
Why on earth would we bring lawyers into this if we don't have to?
You have to either be a lawyer or have completely lost your mind. THIS IS ONE POSITION I AGREE WITH THE MODS ON.
Let them discuss this isn't the first time something controversial has run amuck across the forum and if it needs to be blocked so be it. As long as Russia remains a free country we can use their forum for hacking roms and keep aximsite clean.
Just let everyone go back to daily posting and keep the arguments to minimum.
I know I'm being hypocritical but I just want this to be over.
Well, a lawyer is actually someone who interprets and consults on the law. A barrister is one who is the 'gladiator in the court'.
Quote:
Why on earth would we bring lawyers into this if we don't have to?
Because the moderators have at some point condemned it as illegal, when it is not... so by my understanding, this is their misunderstanding of the law - therefore consulting again with each other will not leave them any more wiser?
Seems to be your understanding that is lacking. Nowhere in the EULA that comes with the X51 does it state that you can use Windows Mobile 5.0 on one device. In fact, it specifically says "You may use the DEVICE Software as installed on the DEVICE." (emphasis mine)
As for upgrades, it also specifically limits these to those provided by DELL, INC.
So, your assumption that you can use any version of WM5 that you can get your hands on is not supported by the license. You can use the copy that came on the device or one provided by Dell specifically designed for upgrading that device.
__________________ -Ike-
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. and To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Well, a lawyer is actually someone who interprets and consults on the law. A barrister is one who is the 'gladiator in the court'.
Unfortunately, it is one person's (Microsoft's Chief Counsel) interpretation of the law is what is causing ALL of these problems. I really don't care to bring any lawyers into the situation.
Originally Posted by JimpsEd
Because the moderators have at some point condemned it as illegal, when it is not... so by my understanding, this is their misunderstanding of the law - therefore consulting again with each other will not leave them any more wiser?
Allow me to clarify the situation. We do not KNOW this is illegal or not. We KNOW that Microsoft will send Cease & Desist papers to the website owner if we allow hackers to continue to discuss these kinds of issues.
So, YOU may go challenge Microsoft on this topic with YOUR TIME, and YOUR MONEY. And if you win, I'm sure the owner of the site will be happy to open-up the forums for discussion. Keep us informed on how your case goes.
There's an easy solution for this - stop everyone from posting but me. ;)
Seriously though - the legality of the software isn't the core issue so much as 'what will keep the forums running smoothly without having to constantly patrol posts for various things which will bring 'cease and desist - oh, and we're also suing you and your families for 50 million dollars PLUS we need you to turn over your databases so all the users who are also now assumed to be pirates can also be sued' letters on their heads, if I'm reading this right.
On the one hand, the mods want to be fair and don't want to have to take a VERY proactive (read: restrictive, heavy-handed) approach to moderating the forums, to the point where every post has to be reviewed by a moderator before being allowed onto a thread. On the other hand, if they restrict certain types of posts to avoid having to do heavy censoring of threads, then they risk being accused of being heavy-handed and corporate sellouts who are mindless Microsoft drones or whatever insult is in vogue this week. Plus there will be complaints, if ROM's are posted, about why AximSite and MobilitySite would allow such dangerous things to be put up, because of the 'I bricked my Axim because of you and I'm reporting you' sort of threads which occasionally crop up in other places.
So now they're trying to put together a policy - so be it. Until they figure out what's allowed and what's not, we'll be wondering just what types of things are considered 'okay' and which ones are not. Lawyers are probably the WORST people to bring into the debate; it's judges who make the rulings as to what sorts of things are accepted and what are not, and politicians who draft the laws that make certain things legal or illegal. Plus, if you really accept the 'lawyers should be the ones deciding what's legal' school of thought, then pretty much ANY law can be twisted about any old way... which opens up a whole new can of worms.
Unfortunately, it is one person's (Microsoft's Chief Counsel) interpretation of the law is what is causing ALL of these problems. I really don't care to bring any lawyers into the situation.
Allow me to clarify the situation. We do not KNOW this is illegal or not. We KNOW that Microsoft will send Cease & Desist papers to the website owner if we allow hackers to continue to discuss these kinds of issues.
So, YOU may go challenge Microsoft on this topic with YOUR TIME, and YOUR MONEY. And if you win, I'm sure the owner of the site will be happy to open-up the forums for discussion. Keep us informed on how your case goes.
Acctually, there is a major issue here that nobody has addressed, which, in cases such as these, is a very fine line...
All of us in the USA have a 5th ammendment right to free speach. We can discuss whatever we want legally, we just cant operate on it. So the DISCUSSION of this hack can be considered legal under the US constatution 5th ammendement, however, if those in the discussion are intent on using the rom or hacking other roms, then it moves to a cominal act (see the fine line? INTENT - which I might add is almost impossible to prove in a court of law)
I see no question that HOSTING the acctual ROM is a problem, however allowing it's discussion should fall under the 5th ammendment.
(if anyone's curious, yes, I love to see these discussions where I can test my knoledge of the legal system, expect to see quite a few posts from me on this thread)
__________________
"There is a differance between living and existing. Existing is sitting, waiting patiently for death. Living is meeting thantos' scythe with your own blade" --- Original
Blackberry 7510 + operamini + $10 boost mobile = unlimited internet on BB w/o $40 BIS plan! (no email though)
Acctually, there is a major issue here that nobody has addressed, which, in cases such as these, is a very fine line...
All of us in the USA have a 5th ammendment right to free speach. We can discuss whatever we want legally, we just cant operate on it. So the DISCUSSION of this hack can be considered legal under the US constatution 5th ammendement, however, if those in the discussion are intent on using the rom or hacking other roms, then it moves to a cominal act (see the fine line? INTENT - which I might add is almost impossible to prove in a court of law)
I see no question that HOSTING the acctual ROM is a problem, however allowing it's discussion should fall under the 5th ammendment.
(if anyone's curious, yes, I love to see these discussions where I can test my knoledge of the legal system, expect to see quite a few posts from me on this thread)
You may be free to speak of or discuss what ultimate is an illegal act, but that doesn't mean you're going to be able to do this in a private forum (such as this board) or that you won't get charged for a crime either... especially not these days, where just mentioning something about wanting to commit an act of terrorism or offering what could be considered a death threat is considered grounds for prosecution.
In the end, this IS a private forum, which abides by the rules and regulations set by the owners of the site and enforced by the moderators. If they don't want us talking about ROM's... then we don't, or we find our posts edited heavily, if the people talking about it aren't banned outright - yes, you're free to talk about it, but the mods are just as free to stop you from doing so on their forum.
5th Amendment contains rights about trials, most famously the due process clause.
One thing is talking about what the law is or what the contract says. I propose that it is more meaningful to discuss what it should be and why. Should MS or Dell be allowed to craft contracts in a certain way? Should we be provided some level of guaranteed updates? Why? Why not?
Should MS or Dell be allowed to craft contracts in a certain way? Should we be provided some level of guaranteed updates? Why? Why not?
I don't remember anyone from Dell coming around to my house and holding a wild gnu to my head and forcing me to buy anything from them.
I made a choice, I bought it from them, and in the process I accepted their contract.
If I felt that the contract infringed on my rights I could have chosen not to buy their product.
__________________
God used to be my copilot but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him to survive.
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Not saying its impossible to do so but hard to argue that. As I am one of many who are willing to pay and yet I find myself looking for whom to buy support for my discontinued product. 
